> V.Kemp wrote:

> Locke's psychological beliefs or believe in God do not discredit his stating of the obvious about maths.

Math is the most pure logic we have. Through advanced mathematics we come to a fuller understanding of the physical universe we live in and what forces and laws govern it. Nothing makes more sense than math. >

That's why I said math requires logic but is not logic itself.

Math is a purely logical system, but not understanding it does not guarantee that one is illogical. It's also another language, and the laziness to learn the language can mean not understanding it. There are also other ways someone wouldn't understand math, such as a cognitive inability to conceptualize numbers.

And expanding on my earlier point in this thread, the US education system does not foster an environment for people to understand the language of math. They don't care to teach it in a way that it can be referenced to experience. Now you might say math isn't empirical, but it is, at least to some degree. For example, 2 + 2 is an abstract representation of having two of something and adding two more of that something. Lets suppose I have two beads and I want to know how many I will have when I acquire two more beads. You get the idea. In the classroom, the teacher doesn't explain things like that. They just do something like pull out a graph and say "plot these points and recognize that this equation suggests this kind of graph." A vivid example I remember is in 8th grade when they first introduced Algebra. The teacher seriously put x on the board and started doing algebra problems without explaining wtf x represented. It took several days of nagging him to get him to give a satisfactory explanation of what x meant lol.

In order for people to understand something it needs to be connected to experience. You don't just understand something without the teacher giving examples.

> Chris_Balsz wrote:

> we know God exists because He told us.>

...

> K. William Fancsali wrote:

> Math is only empirical to some degree? Give me some of what you're smoking.>

I recall saying something to the effect that Math is empirical at least to some degree. That has a different meaning than "Math is only empirical to some degree." If you are questioning whether Math is empirical, I gave an example that it was to some degree. I can give plenty more.

Also, when we learn something, we do so from examples (experience).

<The US education system? The US "education system" is not federally run. There is no "US education system." Vote for a better schoolboard. 8th grade algebra? We did it in 6th, and that was not counting the advanced placement program which did it sooner. If your teacher had trouble explaining what a variable is, your teacher was, in fact, mentally retarded.>

US education may not be 100% controlled by the feds, but there is some central control over education. For example, there is the federal department of education and powerful teacher's unions. US public schools are also extensively similar in quality. So it's perfectly fair to generalize about US education.

Math is as hard as you make it

> avogadro wrote:

> > Justinian I wrote:

> > US public schools are also extensively similar in quality. So it's perfectly fair to generalize about US education.

i wouldnt say that there are public schools in upperclass neighborhoods that are insanely different then public schools in ghettos.>

upper class schools are a minority and probably private schools, so they don't count.

> avogadro wrote:

i agree if you werent saying public schools are generally the same quality. if you were making a broad statement about all public schools, sure. but when your comparing us public schools to one another, you cant ignore the high performing ones.>

Ok then.

> K. William Fancsali wrote:

You're obviously making this up with faith that you're right. It's obvious because you're so wrong. There are DRASTIC differences in different areas even not geographically far, and even more between states.>

That is true. South Carolina has the poorest education quality in the US (Stupid in America), and inner city schools tend to have poorer teachers and fewer resources than suburban ones etc. But that does not change the fact that US schools have some central control, and plainly said, suck compared to the norm in other Western countries.

Suckage. It's what I meant by extensively similar in quality. One school might suck less than the one neighboring it, but they both suck.

> K. William Fancsali wrote:

> Whatever you say.>

Now campaign against teachers' unions.

Let's overgeneralize more so the world knows that your particular areas have awful education! w00t!

lol? You can't do physics or biology without advanced mathematics.

Yeah...  Physics is kind of applied math..